Ben Nelson made an official press release saying the following:
July 30, 2010 – Today, Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson issued this statement on the president’s nomination of Elena Kagan for the U.S. Supreme Court to fill the seat of retired Justice John Paul Stevens:
“As a member of the bipartisan ‘Gang of 14,’ I will follow our agreement that judicial nominees should be filibustered only under extraordinary circumstances. If a cloture vote is held on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court, I am prepared to vote for cloture and oppose a filibuster because, in my view, this nominee deserves an up or down vote in the Senate.
“However, I have heard concerns from Nebraskans regarding Ms. Kagan, and her lack of a judicial record makes it difficult for me to discount the concerns raised by Nebraskans, or to reach a level of comfort that these concerns are unfounded. Therefore, I will not vote to confirm Ms. Kagan’s nomination.”
Why can’t Ben Nelson do the whole “for cloture/against the bill” thing on anything but judicial nominees? Doesn’t his explanation for opposing Kagan sound a lot like Vilsack’s explanation for why he fired Shirley Sherrod? Essentially, if people say bad things about a Democrat you musn’t try to fight back. That’s too hard. You must stop supporting the Democrat and join in the Idiot Chorus.
What I suspect is that Nelson wants the support of anti-choice groups in his state that he’ll probably need to get reelected. Maybe he’ll get some credit for coming out early and cutting the knees out of any Republican who might have been considering voting for confirmation.
The only good thing I can say is that he also provided cover for Republicans who want to split the difference.
I don’t live in Nebraska, but I think moves like this one from Nelson wind up pleasing no one. Nelson didn’t fight as hard as could to oppose a pro-choice judge so the Lifers aren’t going to give him a good score. And the Democrats want to know why Nelson confirms George Bush’s judges but not Barack Obama’s.
Still think there’s no reason to primary shitheads like Nelson? I think this latest bit of assholery pretty much proves that we’d be better off without him, no matter who replaces him. He makes the Democratic Party look weak and contemptible simply because it tolerates him. He’s a prime reason the DNC, etc. won’t get a dime from me.
This ass doesn’t even have the guts to tell us what “concerns” he’s allegedly heard from Nebraskans. Anybody doubt that those “concerns” were expressed in the form of a big corporate check?
Anybody doubt that those “concerns” were expressed in the form of a big corporate check?
What’s funny, or sad depending on your outlook, is that Nebraska’s most famous man is actually pro-choice.
Ben Nelson really is a Republican. He just ran as a Democrat because of political expediency. And now we are paying for it.
I think the odds are good that he will change parties before much longer.
Take his Chairmanship away the day he votes against Kagan. Democrats united not divided…it does make the Dems. look weak.
Take his chairmanship away and I bet he switches parties, making it more likely the Rs take the majority, which cedes control of the senate, such as it is, to the Rs. As bad as Nelson is, it is better to have him sort of on our side than not.
Much as I disagree with him, this is what Democratic Senators should do, not join Republican filibusters. He should have done this on HCR as well. You just don’t filibuster your own party unless it’s about fundamental human rights or the like. You really should make a great effort to support party platform planks as well, but platforms are not real party instruments any more and I don’t expect the Senate to just be a rubber stamp for the President. But you don’t filibuster and if you can’t support at least 50% of major planks you should quit the party.